- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2005 00:59:45 +0000 (UTC)
- To: public-cdf@w3.org
(I've only reviewed the normative parts.) * http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-CDR-20051219/#dom The specification encourages subsetting. Subsets encourage a splintering of the Web, which is bad for everyone. Please change the specification so that subsets are discouraged. * http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-CDR-20051219/#child-to-parent-dom-access The ReferencedDocument interface requires that implementations perform security checks at the element level. Historically, implementations have only needed to perform checks at the Document/Window boundary. Changing this will introduce a very high potential for security bugs. Please do not introduce the ReferencedDocument interface. Instead, the Window.parent member can be used in existing UAs to get to the parent Window context. Please coordinate with the new Web APIs group in creating specifications for the Window interface. * http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-CDR-20051219/#parent-to-child-dom-access The specification contradicts itself. On the one hand it says "If access to the child document is disabled or there is no child document the attribute must be null.", and on the other it says "Accessing parent or child documents through the DOM as described in sections 2.1.2 and 2.1.3 can be disabled for security reasons. In such cases user agents should throw a SecurityException.". Please correct the specification to be clear as to what should happen if the contentDocument attribute is disabled. * http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-CDR-20051219/#security-exception Please do not use a code so close to the LSExceptionCode codes of DOM3 LS, as this may lead to unintended clashes in future. * http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-CDR-20051219/#event-propagation Please define what "events targetted at the document shall propagate to the parent document" means, in particular in terms of the DOM3 Events capture phase. * http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-CDR-20051219/#security-event "When a document breaks through the user agent security policy" -- surely this is supposed to say "When a document attempts to break through the user agent's security policy"? Since if the document has actually broken it, it's too late to do anything. Please change the first sentence of 2.2.2 Security Event to specifically define when the "security" event should be fired. The event doesn't say what its default action is. Please define the default action of the "security" event. * http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-CDR-20051219/#event-related-legacy-markup "what phases it supports" implies that some events may support less than all the phases. This is incorrect. Please remove the mention of "what phases it supports". -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Thursday, 29 December 2005 01:00:08 UTC